Abstract Introduction The cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk score DiCAVA was developed in 2021 using UK Biobank data with the aim to be used for population health screening by deriving its predictions only from variables readily available to every individual, omitting difficult-to-obtain measurements such as blood pressure and invasive blood tests for metrics like cholesterol or HbA1c, which are commonly used in clinical CVD risk assessment tools. The original set of variables was reduced to 30 in the DiCAVA Lite score to further improve usability in a digital solution accessible to the general population, while maintaining its discrimination ability. Purpose Like many countries, the US has a large burden of CVD and would benefit from easily accessible screening tools. However, to ensure generalisability of the UK-developed score, it is necessary to evaluate its performance in a population where the score is intended to be used. Methods Data from a large real-world modern observational study in the US, All of Us, was used to evaluate discrimination and calibration metrics of the risk score. Participants with pre-existing CVD and without available electronic health records were excluded from the study. Variables from the All of Us dataset were matched to the original variables and any missing values were imputed using multiple imputation. Results 216,985 participants with a median follow-up time of 3.44 years were included in the study. The median age was 51 years and 63% of the population were female. Discrimination ability in the All of Us dataset (C-index 0.76) slightly surpassed the discrimination achieved at training with UK Biobank (C-index 0.73), and that of Framingham risk score calculated for the All of Us population (C-index 0.72), demonstrating the score’s usability in the US. The score showed very good discrimination in both males (C-index 0.74) and females (C-index 0.77), all ethnic groups and age groups, with the exception of the population over 65 years of age, where the C-index dropped to 0.65 as expected (similar to that observed in the UK Biobank). Calibration of the original model was assessed at 3 years and showed under-estimation of the predicted risk (calibration-in-the-large of 2.37%). Following re-calibration, the algorithm demonstrated excellent results with the average predicted 3-year risk showing 0.59% difference from the observed CVD rate (calibration plot in Figure). Conclusions Overall, the DiCAVA Lite score has shown very good discrimination in the US, showing its generalisability in different demographic populations. Its re-calibrated form is now validated for use in the US population and because of its ability to be utilised outside clinical settings, it can be deployed widely in the general population as an initial screening tool and potentially boost awareness of cardiovascular health in an effort to drive preventative care of CVD.Re-calibration of the DiCAVA Lite score